|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
23 registered members (mopar, DuckDown11, Bushmaster, jellyhead11, JohnG, Tree Dweller, Paint Rock 00, lthrstkg1, limabean, DHW, JCL, Bread, CAL, bamaeyedoc, jtillery, SC53, mjs14, Bake, Dean, Fatboyslim, Luxfisher, BCLC, 1 invisible),
828
guests, and 0
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Corn rule
[Re: mman]
#1526111
11/18/15 10:29 AM
11/18/15 10:29 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,258
Cullman County
yotetrapper
8 point
|
8 point
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,258
Cullman County
|
"Don't push the limits"? The law is the law, right? If the speed limit is 55, then it is alright to go 55. How would you feel a policeman gave out tickets for going the speed limit based on his perception that you were pushing the limits.
I'm a black and white kind of guy. I don't like perceived gray areas.
220-2-.157 Definition of Area Regulation
For the purposes of Section 9-11-244, Code of Alabama 1975, and Rule 220-2-.11, Alabama Administrative Code, as it applies to the hunting of deer and feral swine, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that any bait or feed (as defined in Section 9-11-244) located beyond 100 yards from the hunter and not within the line of sight of the hunter, is not a lure, attraction or enticement to, on or over the area where the hunter is attempting to kill or take the deer or feral swine. For the purpose of this regulation, “not within the line of sight” means being hidden from view by natural vegetation or naturally occurring terrain features. This regulation shall not apply on public lands.
Note, it says bait or feed. Doesn't matter if supplemental feeding or bait. If it's more than 100 yards away and out of sight, then it is legal according to the way the law is written.
Again, it plainly says the bait has to be out of the line of sight, not the deer.
How is this regulation not clear??? Seems clear to me. It says nothing about an additional 50 yards. That's like saying the speed limit is 55 but you can only go 45 or I will give you a ticket. Pushing the limits of a speed limit is different. Going 57 or 60 is pushing the limit...how many people get tickets going 56 or 57 in a 55?? No, you are wrong. Going 56 breaks the law. It is exceeding the law. When you stay within the law, it is not pushing the limits. If you are going 56 to 60 then you are pushing the limits of getting a ticket for BREAKING the law. 100 yards and out of sight, that is within the limits of the law. 99 yards and you are breaking the law. 99 yards and you are pushing the limits for getting a ticket. Why would a GW give a ticket to someone within the bounds of the law? Because they can, I guess. The law is clear. I think I see the problem here... I disagree, but speed limits are a poor analogy to use in this instance to begin with. You are looking at a regulation that can be rebutted(rebuttable presumption) if you are still hunting by the aid of bait. Example. Bait is 101yards way behind a single tree, you can still kill the deer feeding on the bait. Therefore you ARE hunting by the aid of bait. The LAW is that you cannot hunt by the aid of bait 9-11-244. Once again the closer you get to the flame/push the limit the more likely you'll get burned.
Jon Bartlett
|
|
|
Re: Corn rule
[Re: hardluck]
#1526184
11/18/15 11:00 AM
11/18/15 11:00 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 11,101
coffee county
goodman_hunter
Booner
|
Booner
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 11,101
coffee county
|
i thought once it was 100yards away and out of line of sight,it was considered supplemental feeding.
Couldnt the op argue in court that he wasnt hunting?
"A moment of realization is worth a thousand prayers"
|
|
|
Re: Corn rule
[Re: goodman_hunter]
#1526211
11/18/15 11:14 AM
11/18/15 11:14 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,258
Cullman County
yotetrapper
8 point
|
8 point
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,258
Cullman County
|
i thought once it was 100yards away and out of line of sight,it was considered supplemental feeding.
Couldnt the op argue in court that he wasnt hunting? I had a guy try that... Of course when I show pictures of the tree stand, grunt calls, deer bait, rifle, camo clothes...ect their story doesn't hold up. Are you suggesting that the OP LIE!? Surely not! 
Jon Bartlett
|
|
|
Re: Corn rule
[Re: yotetrapper]
#1526219
11/18/15 11:16 AM
11/18/15 11:16 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 11,101
coffee county
goodman_hunter
Booner
|
Booner
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 11,101
coffee county
|
i thought once it was 100yards away and out of line of sight,it was considered supplemental feeding.
Couldnt the op argue in court that he wasnt hunting? I had a guy try that... Of course when I show pictures of the tree stand, grunt calls, deer bait, rifle, camo clothes...ect their story doesn't hold up. Are you suggesting that the OP LIE!? Surely not! it was youth season, so he didnt have a gun
"A moment of realization is worth a thousand prayers"
|
|
|
Re: Corn rule
[Re: yotetrapper]
#1526227
11/18/15 11:20 AM
11/18/15 11:20 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,138
Tuscaloosa Co.
N2TRKYS
Old Mossy Horns
|
Old Mossy Horns
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,138
Tuscaloosa Co.
|
i thought once it was 100yards away and out of line of sight,it was considered supplemental feeding.
Couldnt the op argue in court that he wasnt hunting? I had a guy try that... Of course when I show pictures of the tree stand, grunt calls, deer bait, rifle, camo clothes...ect their story doesn't hold up. Are you suggesting that the OP LIE!? Surely not! Was it over 100 yards and out of line of sight? Did you write him a ticket?
83% of all statistics are made up.
|
|
|
Re: Corn rule
[Re: yotetrapper]
#1526329
11/18/15 11:56 AM
11/18/15 11:56 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,361
mman
8 point
|
8 point
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,361
|
"Don't push the limits"? The law is the law, right? If the speed limit is 55, then it is alright to go 55. How would you feel a policeman gave out tickets for going the speed limit based on his perception that you were pushing the limits.
I'm a black and white kind of guy. I don't like perceived gray areas.
220-2-.157 Definition of Area Regulation
For the purposes of Section 9-11-244, Code of Alabama 1975, and Rule 220-2-.11, Alabama Administrative Code, as it applies to the hunting of deer and feral swine, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that any bait or feed (as defined in Section 9-11-244) located beyond 100 yards from the hunter and not within the line of sight of the hunter, is not a lure, attraction or enticement to, on or over the area where the hunter is attempting to kill or take the deer or feral swine. For the purpose of this regulation, “not within the line of sight” means being hidden from view by natural vegetation or naturally occurring terrain features. This regulation shall not apply on public lands.
Note, it says bait or feed. Doesn't matter if supplemental feeding or bait. If it's more than 100 yards away and out of sight, then it is legal according to the way the law is written.
Again, it plainly says the bait has to be out of the line of sight, not the deer.
How is this regulation not clear??? Seems clear to me. It says nothing about an additional 50 yards. That's like saying the speed limit is 55 but you can only go 45 or I will give you a ticket. Pushing the limits of a speed limit is different. Going 57 or 60 is pushing the limit...how many people get tickets going 56 or 57 in a 55?? No, you are wrong. Going 56 breaks the law. It is exceeding the law. When you stay within the law, it is not pushing the limits. If you are going 56 to 60 then you are pushing the limits of getting a ticket for BREAKING the law. 100 yards and out of sight, that is within the limits of the law. 99 yards and you are breaking the law. 99 yards and you are pushing the limits for getting a ticket. Why would a GW give a ticket to someone within the bounds of the law? Because they can, I guess. The law is clear. I think I see the problem here... I disagree, but speed limits are a poor analogy to use in this instance to begin with. You are looking at a regulation that can be rebutted(rebuttable presumption) if you are still hunting by the aid of bait. Example. Bait is 101yards way behind a single tree, you can still kill the deer feeding on the bait. Therefore you ARE hunting by the aid of bait. The LAW is that you cannot hunt by the aid of bait 9-11-244. Once again the closer you get to the flame/push the limit the more likely you'll get burned. Rebuttable presumptions means that is taken to be true unless someone comes forward to contest it and PROVE otherwise. Notice, it doesn't mean think, it means PROVE. As far as 9-11-244, it has been clarified and defined so "that any bait or feed (as defined in Section 9-11-244 (which included shelled corn)) located beyond 100 yards from the hunter and not within the line of sight of the hunter, is NOT a lure, attraction or enticement to, on or over the area where the hunter is attempting to kill or take the deer or feral swine..." If shelled corn is defined as not being a lure if it is past 100 yards and out of sight, then why would a GW write a ticket??? Because that is not what they want the law to say, I guess???
|
|
|
Re: Corn rule
[Re: mman]
#1526389
11/18/15 12:33 PM
11/18/15 12:33 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,258
Cullman County
yotetrapper
8 point
|
8 point
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,258
Cullman County
|
[quote=mman]"Don't push the limits"? The law is the law, right? If the speed limit is 55, then it is alright to go 55. How would you feel a policeman gave out tickets for going the speed limit based on his perception that you were pushing the limits.
I'm a black and white kind of guy. I don't like perceived gray areas.
220-2-.157 Definition of Area Regulation
For the purposes of Section 9-11-244, Code of Alabama 1975, and Rule 220-2-.11, Alabama Administrative Code, as it applies to the hunting of deer and feral swine, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that any bait or feed (as defined in Section 9-11-244) located beyond 100 yards from the hunter and not within the line of sight of the hunter, is not a lure, attraction or enticement to, on or over the area where the hunter is attempting to kill or take the deer or feral swine. For the purpose of this regulation, “not within the line of sight” means being hidden from view by natural vegetation or naturally occurring terrain features. This regulation shall not apply on public lands.
Note, it says bait or feed. Doesn't matter if supplemental feeding or bait. If it's more than 100 yards away and out of sight, then it is legal according to the way the law is written.
Again, it plainly says the bait has to be out of the line of sight, not the deer.
How is this regulation not clear??? Seems clear to me. It says nothing about an additional 50 yards. That's like saying the speed limit is 55 but you can only go 45 or I will give you a ticket.
Pushing the limits of a speed limit is different. Going 57 or 60 is pushing the limit...how many people get tickets going 56 or 57 in a 55?? No, you are wrong. Going 56 breaks the law. It is exceeding the law. When you stay within the law, it is not pushing the limits. If you are going 56 to 60 then you are pushing the limits of getting a ticket for BREAKING the law. 100 yards and out of sight, that is within the limits of the law. 99 yards and you are breaking the law. 99 yards and you are pushing the limits for getting a ticket. Why would a GW give a ticket to someone within the bounds of the law? Because they can, I guess. The law is clear. I think I see the problem here... I disagree, but speed limits are a poor analogy to use in this instance to begin with. You are looking at a regulation that can be rebutted(rebuttable presumption) if you are still hunting by the aid of bait. Example. Bait is 101yards way behind a single tree, you can still kill the deer feeding on the bait. Therefore you ARE hunting by the aid of bait. The LAW is that you cannot hunt by the aid of bait 9-11-244. Once again the closer you get to the flame/push the limit the more likely you'll get burned. Rebuttable presumptions means that is taken to be true unless someone comes forward to contest it and PROVE otherwise. Notice, it doesn't mean think, it means PROVE. As far as 9-11-244, it has been clarified and defined so "that any bait or feed (as defined in Section 9-11-244 (which included shelled corn)) located beyond 100 yards from the hunter and not within the line of sight of the hunter, is NOT a lure, attraction or enticement to, on or over the area where the hunter is attempting to kill or take the deer or feral swine..." If shelled corn is defined as not being a lure if it is past 100 yards and out of sight, then why would a GW write a ticket??? Because that is not what they want the law to say, I guess??? [/quote] Correct, in that, I must PROVE that the corn/whatever bait you have at 101 yards away is still a violation of 9-11-244. If your bait is behind a ant bed 101 yards away in a open greenfield, then you'll likely have to present your case in court. If the judge rules in your favor then I will adjust my enforcement of 9-11-244 accordingly.
Jon Bartlett
|
|
|
Re: Corn rule
[Re: goodman_hunter]
#1526397
11/18/15 12:35 PM
11/18/15 12:35 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,258
Cullman County
yotetrapper
8 point
|
8 point
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,258
Cullman County
|
i thought once it was 100yards away and out of line of sight,it was considered supplemental feeding.
Couldnt the op argue in court that he wasnt hunting? I had a guy try that... Of course when I show pictures of the tree stand, grunt calls, deer bait, rifle, camo clothes...ect their story doesn't hold up. Are you suggesting that the OP LIE!? Surely not! it was youth season, so he didnt have a gun His child did and hunting includes every act of assistance to any person taking or attempting to take wilds animals...ect.
Jon Bartlett
|
|
|
Re: Corn rule
[Re: N2TRKYS]
#1526405
11/18/15 12:38 PM
11/18/15 12:38 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,258
Cullman County
yotetrapper
8 point
|
8 point
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,258
Cullman County
|
i thought once it was 100yards away and out of line of sight,it was considered supplemental feeding.
Couldnt the op argue in court that he wasnt hunting? I had a guy try that... Of course when I show pictures of the tree stand, grunt calls, deer bait, rifle, camo clothes...ect their story doesn't hold up. Are you suggesting that the OP LIE!? Surely not! Was it over 100 yards and out of line of sight? Did you write him a ticket? No. Best I remember 45 yards in a wide open greenfield. Yes. He pled guilty after I presented my evidence.
Jon Bartlett
|
|
|
Re: Corn rule
[Re: Megatrondiablo]
#1526418
11/18/15 12:45 PM
11/18/15 12:45 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 11,418
Central, Al
Bustinbeards
Booner
|
Booner
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 11,418
Central, Al
|
What were the odds of a gw coming and checking on you? I have never been checked. I might have jinxed myself. Has there been baiting issues before at your club? Not pointing fingers at all. It just seems like he found the needle in the hay stack with you. But he should have left your boy out of it. And just dealt with you. IMO I had one come in on me on the first weekend of bow season, it was on a 1700 ac lease behind locked gates and I was on where near the property lines and the only one hunting... And I agree green jeans should have left the child out and deal with the adult.
I Well, the way I see it is there's just too many assholes
On a good day there's a bunch of assholes in here.
On a bad day there's too many assholes in here.
|
|
|
Re: Corn rule
[Re: timbercruiser]
#1526840
11/18/15 04:25 PM
11/18/15 04:25 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,258
Cullman County
yotetrapper
8 point
|
8 point
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,258
Cullman County
|
That's what is wrong with the law is the even though it has been defined a GW can use his opinion to ignore the law.
Beyond 100 yards and the bait or feed out of sight. Like it or not, that is what is says. Incorrect. I do not use my opinion to build a case against a suspect. I use the facts. Cases built on opinions will not get convictions. It is not my opinion that you are hunting by the aid of bait if the deer is 101yards way and feeding on a corn pile you placed behind a single tree or clup of dirt. It is a fact that that bait is aiding you in killing that deer. Now the regulation says that you can place feed 101 yards away and out of sight and be legal as long as it can not be proven that the bait is still aiding you. Again this regulation was not put in place to assist you with killing a deer. It was put in place to allow people to provide a supplemental source of food for animals without aiding the same people in killing a deer. When applied properly this regulation does just what was intended, but people that want to hunt with bait do their best to corrupt it's meaning and intent and then end up in the wrong. And now since I'm beginning to repeat myself I will leave the topic to y'all. Yotetrapper, I have wondered about the "bait" part this, could a game warden write a ticket if a hunter is using a scent lure, a grunt call or a sex lure while deer hunting? No, but things like apple flavored salt blocks are considered bait. If they'll eat it then it's bait.
Jon Bartlett
|
|
|
Re: Corn rule
[Re: timbercruiser]
#1526911
11/18/15 04:46 PM
11/18/15 04:46 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 37,861
Boxes Cove
2Dogs
Freak of Nature
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 37,861
Boxes Cove
|
"Could" a food plot be considered bait? Not if bush hogged corn isn't. 
"Why do you ask"?
Always vote the slowest path to socialism.
|
|
|
Re: Corn rule
[Re: hardluck]
#1526961
11/18/15 05:05 PM
11/18/15 05:05 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 38,489
N. Bama
257wbymag
Boo Boo Head
|
Boo Boo Head
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 38,489
N. Bama
|
Bush hogged corn is only bait for waterfowl.
Quietly killing turkeys where youre not!!!
My tank full of give a fraks been runnin on empty
I'm the paterfamilias
|
|
|
|
